1 1  m 


DS 
115 
I  A237r 


■ 


•o  i=< 


V    « 


toodiiw-jo5^ 


<C?13DWS01^ 


%a3AIN(l3^ 


FO/?^ 


-^E-UNIVERS/a 


^U)S-ANCElfj> 


<Til3DNVS01^ 


%83AINl)  3*^ 


OSANGFlf^ 


"%13AINrHttV 


.--- 
$ 


^E-LIBRARYQr 


«*? 


vANCElfJ> 


^OFCALIF0%       ^.OFCAllFOft^ 


jonvsoi^     "^/ya3AiNn-3\\vs       ^Aavasin^7     ^Aavasin^ 


ER5/A 


AJJCEtfr., 


<rm.  "%a3AiNn-3v\v 


^ 


^OFCA 


IB^ 


01^ 


ilfj> 


1VER57/J 


i§3 


(T* 


' 


HtW 


QUESTIONS 
OF  THE  DAY 


THE  REVIVAL  OF  ANTI-SEMITISM 
By  Felix  Adler 


This  pamphlet  is  issued  as  a  Supplement  to  the  current  number  of  THE 

STANDARD,  a  magazine  published  "to  promote   ethical  thinking  and  to 

;ncourage  better  ways  of  living."    Subscriptions,  at  the  rate  of  one  dollar  per 

/ear  (nine  issues)  may  be  entered  by  addressing 

THE  AMERICAN  ETHICAL  UNION 

2  West  64th  Street,  New  York  City 
January,  1921 


PRICE,  TEN  CENTS 


The  Library 
University  of  California,  Los  Angeles 


The  gift  of  Mrs.  Cummings,  1963 


^•■■■■■■■■■■■B 


vs 

THE    REVIVAL    OF    ANTI-SEMITISM*    -V*-t 

By  FELIX  ADLER 

Why  anti-Semitic  and  not  anti-Jewish?  Anti-Semitic  propa- 
ganda is  as  virulent  as  plain  Jew-baiting  ever  was.  Why  the  new 
name?  It  is  not  really  designed  to  soften  antipathy,  but  rather 
to  give  it  a  larger  setting,  a  quasi-scientific  legitimation.  The 
Semitic  group  of  peoples,  including  the  ancient  Babylonians,  Syri- 
ans and  Arabs,  as  well  as  the  Hebrews,  were  Asiatics.  The  impli- 
cation of  the  name  anti-Semitism  is  that  the  descendants  of  the 
ancient  Hebrews,  the  Jews,  have  remained  deeply-dyed  Asiatics, 
Oriental  interlopers  in  Western  countries,  an  alien,  uncongenial 
element  in  the  population  that  ought  of  right  to  be  extruded.  I 
shall  examine  this  opinion  in  the  course  of  my  address,  but  so 
much  for  the  name. 

The  more  recent  revival  of  anti-Jewish  hostility  (call  it  anti- 
Semitism  for  brevity's  sake  if  you  will),  dates  back  to  the  'eighties 
of  the  last  century.  The  movement  at  that  time  was  deliberately 
fostered  for  political  ends.  It  was  "made  in  Germany"  by  Bis- 
marck when  he  broke  with  the  National  Liberals  and  their  Jewish 
leader  Lasker,  and  was  used,  as  is  generally  believed,  to  inflame 
Teutonic  nationalism,  and  to  discredit  liberalism  in  general  by 
turning  popular  feeling  against  its  Jewish  exponents.  But  it  was 
also  made  in  Russia,  where  frightful  excesses  accompanied  it,  with 
the  deliberate  intent  of  heading  off  the  revolutionary  tendencies 
that  were  even  then  threatening  the  autocratic  system  of  govern- 
ment by  directing  the  restless  discontent  of  the  Russian  people 
against  the  Jews. 

The  anti-Semitic  movement  in  France,  which  culminated  in  the 
notorious  Dreyfus  affair,  was  likewise  artificially  stimulated  in  the 
interest  of  a  militaristic  and  clerical  intrigue  aiming  at  a  monar- 
chical restoration. 

But  politicians  cannot  actually  make  movements.  They  can 
only  astutely  avail  themselves  of  tendencies  already  in  existence; 
they  can  fan  fires  that  are  smouldering  beneath  the  ashes;  they 
can  add  fuel  to  the  flames;  they  can  provoke  explosions  like  the 


*  An  address  delivered  before  the  New  York  Society  for  Ethical  Culture, 
Sunday,  December  5,  1920. 


2098&22 


pogroms;  they  can  let  loose  ferocious  instincts  that  are  latent  in 
the  crowd.  And  if  we  would  understand  what  has  happened,  and 
what  is  again  happening,  we  must  probe, beneath  the  surface,  and 
search  out  the  continuous  causes  of  that  feeling  against  the  Jews 
which  has  been  prevalent  during  so  many  centuries.  And  when 
we  do  this  we  are  forced  to  recognize  rather  painfully  that  the 
world  is  not  so  far  along  as  over-sanguine  optimists  had  supposed. 
The  fighting  instinct  is  still  as  active  as  ever.  The  exploitation 
of  the  weak  by  the  strong  has  hardly  become  more  merciful ;  and 
certain  other  crude  instincts  which  men  today  have  inherited 
from  their  primeval  ancestors  seem  not  to  have  abated  their  force. 

Of  these  primeval  instincts  which  I  allude  to  as  pertinent  to  the 
subject  we  are  discussing,  the  first  is  racial  antipathy,  due  to  the 
animosity  felt  towards  persons  of  different  language  or  different 
social  habits,  or  both.  Uneducated  people  despise  foreigners.  A 
foreign  language  to  their  ears  is  a  ridiculous  jargon.  They  also 
distrust  and  are  easily  led  to  hate  those  whose  mental  outlook  is 
at  all  different  from  their  own.  Contrariwise,  it  is  the  mark  of 
high  culture  not  only  to  tolerate  but  to  welcome  and  appreciate 
unlikeness  in  others.  The  Jews,  perhaps,  are  peculiarly  sensitive 
to  the  hostility  which  they  often  arouse.  But  they  are  not  the 
only  victims,  for  in  fact  such  racial  antipathies  crop  up  all  over 
the  earth,  as  for  instance  between  Czechs  and  Germans  in  Bohe- 
mia, between  Poles  and  Ruthenians,  between  Turks  and  Arme- 
nians, between  the  Chinese  and  Japanese,  and  so  on  without  end. 

The  second  primitive  tendency  that  plays  a  prominent  part  in 
the  phenomena  we  are  considering  is  what  may  be  called  the  scape- 
goat tendency ;  or,  to  put  my  idea  more  precisely,  the  tendency  to 
ascribe  to  personal  agents  what  is  really  the  effect  of  complex 
causes.  The  average  mind  as  yet  is  a  pot  of  very  small  calibre, 
and  by  no  means  a  pot  of  gold,  but  rather  filled  with  a  good  deal  of 
dross.  The  average  human  brain  is  a  rude  mechanism,  fit  to  turn 
out  gross  fabrics,  but  not  to  sp*in  and  weave  the  finer  silken  threads 
of  thought.  The  average  human  mind,  outside  of  the  round  of 
daily  experience,  is  unaccustomed  to  trace  effects  back  to  their 
causes,  and  in  their  stead  invents  personal,  and  usually  evil  or 
diabolical  agents.  Thus  in  primitive  times  every  disease  was 
ascribed  to  demoniac  possession.  The  causes  of  disease  being  far 
from  simple  and  frequently  obscure,  the  theory  of  demoniac  pos- 


session  was  resorted  to  by  way  of  explanation.  The  sickness  is 
just  caused  by  a  devil  inside  the  man.  Nothing  could  be  simpler. 
Drive  out  the  devil  and  the  man  will  be  cured.  And  this  primi- 
tive tendency  does  not  disappear  in  the  course  of  human  history. 
In  the  Middle  Ages,  at  the  time  when  the  Black  Plague  swept  over 
Europe,  carrying  off  twenty-five  million  of  its  inhabitants,  the 
lack  of  the  most  elementary  hygienic  precautions,  the  foul,  unsani- 
tary conditions,  that  prevailed  in  the  castles  of  the  nobles  as  well 
as  in  the  hovels  of  the  poor, — in  a  word,  the  causes,  were  not 
known,  were  not  observed.  But  the  personal  agents  who  were 
answerable  for  the  pestilence  were  easily  discovered.  The 
Jews  were  the  malevolent  foes  of  the  human  race  that  had  pro- 
duced the  calamity.  They  had  poisoned  the  wells,  and  nothing 
more  needed  to  be  said. 

And  now,  in  the  twentieth  year  of  the  twentieth  century,  the 
same  unspeakably  crude  disposition  to  substitute  personal  agency 
for  causes  once  again  manifests  itself.  There  is  widespread  un- 
rest in  the  world.  Society  is  stirred  to  its  depths.  The  laboring 
masses  are  in  commotion.  The  smaller  nationalities  as  well  as 
the  great  powers  are  at  odds.  There  is  unparalleled  economic 
distress.  Millions  are  starving  in  Europe.  Forty  millions  are 
threatened  with  starvation  in  China.  Arabia  is  agitated;  India 
palpitates  with  suppressed  revolt.  The  baleful  star  of  Bolshev- 
ism has  risen,  and  shows  as  yet  no  sign  of  setting.  The  causes 
are  manifold  and  intricate.  But  the  desire  to  find  some  individual 
or  some  group  upon  whose  devoted  head  the  total  sin  of  mankind 
may  be  devolved,  to  whose  malevolent  efficacy  the  universal  woe 
may  be  ascribed,  is  again  to  the  fore,  and  a  book  has  just  been 
published  in  this  city,  entitled  The  Cause  of  World  Unrest,  which 
has  discovered  the  scapegoat,  and  proposes  to  hold  him  up  to 
reprobation.  It  is  the  Jews  who  are  the  authors  of  all  this  mis- 
chief. A  group  of  Jews,  it  is  solemnly  declared,  have  been 
secretly  working  for  centuries  to  throw  all  Christendom  into  con- 
fusion, to  embroil  the  nations  with  one  another,  and  to  poison 
this  time,  not  the  wells,  but  the  minds  of  the  peoples.  And  to 
what  end?  In  order  to  destroy  the  Christian  religion,  and  indeed 
all  religions  except  the  Jewish,  and  in  order  to  found,  on  the  ruins 
of  our  existing  civilization,  the  universal  monarchy  of  a  descend- 
ant of  King  David. 


The  document  which  forms  the  basis  of  this  fantastic  accusa- 
tion is  the  so-called  protocols  of  the  so-called  Elders  of  Zion.  The 
Elders  of  Zion  are  purely  fictitious  personages  that  exist  nowhere 
save  in  the  imagination  of  the  writer  of  the  protocols.  And  the 
protocols  themselves  are  a  rather  lamentable  fabrication.  They 
were  brought  to  light  by  a  certain  Russian  named  Nilus,  who  had 
them  from  a  lady  of  unknown  name,  who  in  turn  received  them 
from  a  mysterious  individual.  That  any  sane  person  should  pay 
attention  to  a  document  with  no  better  authentication  than  that 
it  was  received  from  a  lady  of  unknown  name,  and  in  turn  from  a 
mysterious  individual,  seems  incredible,  especially  when  it  is  a 
document  that  launches  a  terrible  indictment  against  a  whole 
people,— or  if  not  against  the  people  in  their  entirety,  against 
their  leaders. 

Of  course  it  is  admitted  by  the  London  Morning  Post,  which 
makes  use  of  the  protocols,  that  there  is  no  external  evidence  in 
support  of  their  authenticity.  Why  then  treat  the  document  as 
if  it  were  important?  Why  conjure  up  a  supposed  Jewish  peril 
on  the  basis  of  it?  Because  of  the  internal  evidence,  it  is  said. 
Now  I  hold  that  to  prove  that  there  is  internal  evidence  of  the 
actual  or  possible  truth  of  the  accusation,  it  would  have  been 
necessary  to  compare  the  mentality  manifested  in  the  protocols 
with  the  Jewish  mentality  as  expressed  in  the  history  and  the  age- 
long literature  of  the  Jewish  people.  There  it  lies,  open  to  inspec- 
tion. There  are  reflected  the  mental  and  moral  characteristics 
of  the  Jews,  their  aspirations  and  ambitions,  their  intellectuality, 
their  practicality,  their  ecstatic  mysticism.  I  venture  to  say 
that  any  one  who  makes  the  comparison  between  the  Machia- 
vellianism, the  cruelty,  the  stupid  intrigue,  ascribed  to  the  Jews 
in  the  document,  and  their  actual  characteristics  as  revealed  in 
their  history  and  literature,  will  discover,  not  agreement,  but  the 
exact  contrary;  the  sort  of  mentality  that  is  imprinted  on  the  pro- 
tocols is,  if  anything,  that  of  Russian  autocracy,  the  mentality  of 
the  Jews  is  totally  different. 

But  then  it  is  said  there  is  the  "uncanny  correspondence"  be- 
tween the  plot  as  outlined  in  the  protocols  and  Trotzky,  Zinoviev 
and  the  rest  of  the  Jewish  Bolshevists !  Suggestion  has  a  powerful 
effect  on  belief.  Suggest  a  thing  often  enough,  and  by  and  by  the 
unthinking  will  accept  it  as  a  fact.     But  is  there  this  uncanny 


correspondence?  Is  there  any  correspondence  at  all?  Briefly, 
the  fictitious  Elders  of  Zion  are  supposed  to  have  planned  to 
create  universal  unrest.  For  what  purpose?  In  order  to  destroy 
the  Christian  and  every  other  religion  and  to  exalt  the  Jewish 
faith.  But  Trotzky  and  the  others  are  materialists,  and  indiffer- 
ent or  hostile  to  every  religion,  the  Jewish  among  the  rest.  And 
again,  the  general  chaos  is  to  be  the  prelude  to  the  creation  of  a 
Jewish  monarchy.  But  Trotzky  and  the  rest  are  Communists. 
The  protocols  propose  a  new  society  based  on  the  recognition  of 
castes;  Trotzky  and  the  rest  are  levelers.  Where  then  is  the  cor- 
respondence, uncanny  or  otherwise?  There  is  instead  a  total 
absence  of  correspondence.  To  assert  that  the  Jewish  Bolshevists 
are  secretly  aiming,  in  connivance  with  the  suppositious  Elders  of 
Zion,  at  universal  dominion  under  a  prince  of  the  House  of  David, 
and  at  the  sole  exaltation  of  the  Jewish  faith,  is  a  perfectly  gratui- 
tous assumption.  There  is  not  a  straw  of  evidence  to  warrant  it. 
All  the  evidence  points  the  other  way. 

But  there  must  be  a  motive.  I  mean  a  motive  on  the  part  of 
the  London  Morning  Post  that  has  actuated  it  in  making  use  of 
these  pitiful  protocols  and  alarming  the  world,  under  the  guise  of  a 
severe  and  impartial  desire  to  know  the  truth,  with  the  scarecrow 
of  a  Jewish  conspiracy.  The  motive,  I  am  afraid,  is  not  far  to 
seek.  The  whole  thing  looks  very  much  like  a  piece  of  reactionary 
propaganda.  For,  observe  that  the  attack  is  directed  not  against 
the  Jews  alone,  but  against  Continental  Freemasonry,  especially 
the  Grand  Orient,  against  the  League  of  Nations,  against  Mr. 
Wilson  ("Wilsonism  has  much  in  common  with  Bolshevism"), 
and  against  liberalism  in  general.  The  object  appears  to  be  to 
discredit  liberalism  by  associating  it  with  Bolshevism,  and  to  in- 
tensify the  hatred  against  Bolshevism  by  representing  the  Jews 
as  its  authors.  The  circumstance  that  certain  Jews,  Mr.  Mon- 
tagu, Sir  Alfred  Mond,  and  Lord  Reading,  are  mentioned  by 
name,  gives  color  to  the  suspicion  that  influences  connected  with 
English  politics  may  also  have  operated.  As  to  the  reason  why 
this  same  propaganda  is  at  present  conducted  in  America,  the 
protest  of  the  Jewish  societies  of  this  city,  recently  published  in  the 
newspapers,  assigns  as  its  motive  the  attempt  to  drive  a  wedge 
between  the  Jewish  citizens  in  America  and  their  fellow-citizens. 
I  find  this  reason,  if  I  may  say  so,  not  altogether  convincing. 


The  more  probable  object  seems  to  me  to  be  here  the  same  as  else- 
where, namely,  to  serve  the  purposes  of  reaction,  to  disparage 
liberalism  by  associating  it  with  Bolshevism,  and  to  intensify  the 
feeling  against  Bolshevism  by  incriminating  the  Jews  in  connec- 
tion with  it.  As  public  opinion  in  America  at  present  is  a  force  to 
be  reckoned  with  in  European  countries,  any  movement  against 
the  Jews  on  this  side  of  the  water  would  be  helpful  in  reinforcing 
the  reactionary  propaganda  abroad. 

In  finishing  this  part  of  my  subject  I  should  like  to  say  that  it 
seems  to  me  a  mistake  to  regard  Trotzky  and  his  friends  as  in  any 
sense  the  originators  of  the  Russian  Bolshevist  movement.  Lenin, 
according  to  all  accounts,  is  the  head  and  front  of  the  movement. 
Trotzky  and  the  others  are  his  lieutenants.  It  is  not  indeed  sur- 
prising that  the  more  radical  element  among  the  Russian  Jews 
should  be  prominent  in  Bolshevist  councils.  In  the  first  place, 
because  they  have  suffered  deeply,  and  even  more  grievously  than 
others,  from  the  bitter  persecution  of  the  autocracy.  Then  the 
preponderant  majority  of  the  Communists  are  peasants  or  man- 
ual workers.  The  number  of  men  of  intellectual  capacity  and 
training  at  Lenin's  disposal  is  small.  It  is  therefore  natural  that 
he  should  avail  himself  of  the  Jewish  talent  among  his  comrades. 
But  to  suppose  that  the  Jews  are  the  authors  of  the  Russian  revo- 
lution, and  in  this  sense  responsible  for  Bolshevism,  is  quite 
erroneous.  The  causes  of  the  Russian  revolution  are  the  break- 
down of  the  bureaucratic  system,  the  land-hunger  of  the  peasants, 
which  the  bureaucracy  refused  to  satisfy,  the  war-weariness  of  the 
Russian  people,  and  then  there  is  the  necessity  for  some  kind  of 
strong  government  to  take  the  place  of  that  which  had  disappeared. 
Some  Jews,  in  virtue  of  their  keen  intellectuality,  are  radicals, 
others  are  conservative .  The  greater  number  in  European  countries 
as  well  as  in  America,  are  if  anything  too  conservative.  Stahl  (a 
Jew)  was  the  principal  philosopher  of  conservatism  after  Hegel 
in  Germany.  Beaconsfield  was  the  admired  head  of  the  con- 
servative party  in  England.  To  hold  up  the  Jews,  therefore,  as 
the  originators  of  the  world  unrest,  is  absurd.  The  absurd- 
ity is  aggravated  when  we  read,  in  the  book  I  have  been  dis- 
cussing, that  not  only  the  Russian  revolution,  but  the  insta- 
bility in  India,  in  Egypt,  and  even  in  Ireland,  is  the  work  of  their 
subtle  brains ;  and  the  absurdity  reaches  perhaps  its  climax  when 


we  learn  that  they  are  not  only  responsible  for  every  restless  move- 
ment in  the  world,  but  are  also  the  authors  of  the  anti-Semitic 
movement  which  is  directed  against  their  own  people.  They  are 
provoking  the  pogroms,  etc.,  in  order  to  whip  into  line  their  tardy 
or  unwilling  fellow-Jews.  The  lucubrations  of  a  brain  that  can 
invent  such  fables  as  these  should  be  recommended  to  the  study 
of  alienists. 

We  have  thus  considered  several  of  the  causes  that  account  for 
the  continuance  of  the  anti-Jewish  prejudice.  But  would  it  be 
fair,  in  an  impartial  survey,  to  omit  those  traits  in  the  character 
of  the  Jews  themselves  to  which  exception  is  taken?  The  most 
prominent  of  these  has  been  the  practice  of  usury,  especially  in 
countries  of  backward  economic  development.  This  need  not 
detain  us  long,  as  it  has  been  fully  and  frequently  treated.  The 
Church  put  the  taking  of  interest  under  its  ban  absolutely.  All 
Christians  were  forbidden  to  lend  money  at  interest.  Interest- 
taking  as  such  was  stigmatized  as  usury.  Now  in  the  second 
half  of  the  Middle  Ages,  large  amounts  of  capital  were  needed  in 
order  to  carry  on  magnificent  building  operations,  to  equip  armies, 
etc.  The  Jews  possessed  available  capital,  which  they  had  accu- 
mulated by  carrying  on  the  trade  in  spices,  silks,  etc.,  between 
the  Far  East  and  Europe.  The  capital  of  the  Jews  therefore  was 
in  great  request, — and  the  Jews,  being  outside  the  pale  of  the 
Canon  Law,  were  permitted  to  do  what  was  forbidden  to  the 
Christian.  In  consequence,  for  a  time  they  were  bankers  on  a 
large  scale.  Then  they  were  displaced  by  the  Lombards,  and 
more  and  more  crowded  into  petty  trades  and  usury, — -the  more 
honorable  callings  being  shut  against  them. 

But  the  practice  of  usury  is  not  the  only  accusation,  and  in- 
deed if  I  were  here  undertaking  a  psychological  study,  I  could 
myself  point  to  far  more  fundamental  faults  in  the  Jewish  char- 
acter. I  think  it  is  a  mistake  to  plead  as  an  apologist  for  the 
Jews  in  the  sense  of  glorifying  all  their  virtues  and  ignoring  their 
defects.-  What  I  do  affirm  is  that  we  ought  to  take  the  French 
mot  concerning  les  dejaats  de  ses  qualites  and  les  qualites  de  ses 
defauts  literally.  What  I  insistently  affirm  is  that  in  the  character 
of  every  people,  as  of  every  individual,  there  are  the  shadows  and 
the  lights,  there  is  the  fine  side  and  there  is  the  seamy  side  of 
character,  and  that  it  is  unjust  to  turn  the  seamy  side  upward  as 


if  that  told  the  whole  story,  precisely  as  it  would  be  sophomoric 
to  emphasize  only  the  bright  side  as  if  the  darker  under-side  did 
not  exist.  In  every  people,  to  speak  roughly,  there  are,  either 
overt  or  latent,  both  a  Jekyll  and  a  Hyde.  On  what  then  do  we 
base  the  distinction  between  the  good  and  the  bad?  On  the 
fact  that  in  the  one  case  the  nobler  qualities  predominate,  in  the 
other  case  for  the  time  being  at  least  the  baser  qualities  predom- 
inate. Apply  this  to  the  Jews — apply  it  to  any  people.  What 
would  you  say,  for  instance,  if  some  one  should  declare  that  the 
French  are  a  cruel,  a  peculiarly  blood-thirsty  people?  Witness 
Robespierre  and  the  Terror.  Has  there  been  anything  just  like 
the  Terror  in  the  history  of  other  nations?  Witness  the  massa- 
cre of  defenceless  prisoners.  Witness  farther  back  the  horrors 
of  St.  Bartholomew's  night,  the  atrocities  perpetrated  in  the 
days  of  the  Armagnacs.  Yes,  some  one  will  say,  on  the 
strength  of  this  evidence  the  French  are  a  bloody-minded  people. 
And  they  are  also  a  lascivious  people,  witness  Paris.  Would  such 
a  judgment  in  your  opinion  be  less  than  scandalous?  It  is  per- 
fectly true  that  some  Frenchmen  at  some  periods  of  French 
history  have  been  cruel  and  bloody-minded.  But  does  that  at 
all  warrant  the  generalization  that  the  French  people  as  a  whole 
are  cruel?  or  that  the  French  are  lascivious  because  the  aspect  of 
Paris  seen  by  the  tourist  may  be  so?  And  above  all,  how  can 
any  one  who  speaks  of  France  forget  the  magnificent  side  of  the 
French  character  and  of  French  history? — the  generosities  of 
France,  the  humanitarian  enthusiasms  of  France,  the  charm  of 
France,  the  achievements  of  France  in  science,  in  literature,  in 
the  arts? 

In  a  similar  fashion  one  could  arouse  bitter  feeling  against 
England  by  pointing  out  all  the  stains  upon  her  record, — for  in- 
stance, her  contest  with  Spain  in  the  eighteenth  century  for  the 
horrible  privilege  of  carrying  on  the  slave  trade;  her  maltreat- 
ment of  Ireland  during  so  many  centuries,  and  the  like, — for- 
getting that  England  is  the  Mother  of  Parliaments;  that,  we  owe 
to  her  the  foundations  of  political  liberty;  that  she  abolished  the 
slave  trade  before  we  did;  that  her  best  men  and  women  are 
eager  today  to  make  good,  if  they  can  only  see  a  way,  the  wrongs 
of  the  sister  island. 

Apply  the  same  criterion,  I  repeat,  to  the  Jews.     Have  their 


valuable  qualities  predominated?  Have  they  contributed  things 
that  are  worth  while  to  the  civilization  of  the  world?  Are  they 
still  capable  of  making  such  contributions? 

And  this  leads  me  to  allude  to  the  charge  to  which  I  referred  in 
the  beginning,  to  which  the  name  anti-Semitism  is  due,  namely 
that  the  Jews  are  Orientals,  or  Asiatics,  who  have  no  place  in 
Western  civilization.  On  the  contrary,  they  are  eminently 
Western-minded.  The  proof  of  this  can  be  found  admirably 
summarized  in  a  book  by  the  well-known  writer  Joseph  Jacobs, 
entitled  Jewish  Contributions  to  Civilization.  It  is  no  exaggera- 
tion to  say  that  they  are  eminently  Western-minded,  because 
they  have  so  largely  assisted  in  building  up  Western  civilization. 
Mathematics  is  the  foundation  on  which  rest  the  physical  sciences. 
Jewish  mathematicians  brought  the  Indian  arithmetic  and  geom- 
etry to  the  knowledge  of  the  West.  Jewish  astronomers  took  a 
conspicuous  part  in  preparing  the  astronomical  tables  that  serve 
for  navigation.  The  tables  used  by  Columbus  on  his  voyage  were 
compiled  by  Zucato,  the  Jewish  astronomer  to  the  King  of 
Portugal.  The  quadrant  used  by  Columbus  was  invented  by 
the  Jew  Gersonides.  The  two  most  distinguished  Jewish  philoso- 
phers were  Maimonides  in  the  twelfth  century  and  Spinoza  in 
the  seventeenth.  Maimonides  profoundly  influenced  the  writings 
of  the  great  scholastics,  Albertus  Magnus  and-Thomas  Aquinas. 
The  widely  radiating  influence  of  Spinoza,  down  to  the  present 
day,  not  only  in  philosophy,  but  in  literature,  requires  no  com- 
ment. Nor  is  it  necessary  to  expatiate  on  the  outburst  of  Jewish 
talent  in  the  last  one  hundred  years,  as  evidenced  in  every  one  of 
the  physical  sciences,  in  philology,  in  history,  etc.  The  point  I 
am  considering  is:  Are  the  Jews  Western-minded  or  not?  Is 
their  mentality  congenial  to  that  of  the  Western  nations?  As 
proof,  I  cite  the  fact  of  their  great  participation  in  erecting  the 
intellectual  framework  of  Western  civilization.  Again,  they  are 
Western  in  their  loyalties.  Goldwin  Smith  in  conversation  once 
expressed  to  me  his  misgivings  lest  in  case  of  strain  the  clan  feel- 
ing of  the  Jews  might  overcome  their  patriotic  feelings.  The 
late  war  has  shown  to  an  extraordinary  degree  that  the  national 
feeling  of  the  Jews  in  all  countries  has  overcome  their  racial 
feelings. 

But  if  we  desire  to  understand  the  spirit  of  a  people  in  its  depths, 


we  must  inquire  as  to  its  religion.  Have  the  Jews  in  religion 
shown  themselves  alien  or  congenial  to  the  Western  nations? 
Here  certainly  the  facts  speak  loudly.  The  Hebrew  Bible  is  the 
fountain  from  which  the  Western  peoples  have  drawn  their 
inspiration  in  religion.  Open  the  Roman  Breviary  or  the  Book 
of  Common  Prayer,  and  you  will  find  them  stocked  with  the 
religious  poetry  of  the  Hebrew  psalmists.  Although  attempts 
were  made  from  time  to  time  by  certain  Christian  sects  to  elim- 
inate the  Old  Testament  from  the  Bible,  leaving  only  the  New, 
such  attempts  were  always  discountenanced.  In  the  eyes  of  the 
Church  the  Old  Testament  is  the  indispensable  foundation  of  the 
New.  But  if  this  is  so,  we  may  ask, — W7hy  did  the  Church  turn 
so  bitterly  against  the  very  people  from  whom  it  had  inherited 
its  sacred  Scripture?  Why  did  the  Church  permit  the  long-con- 
tinued persecution  of  the  Jews?  Why  did  it  excite  the  hatred  of 
the  masses  against  the  kinsmen  of  Jesus  and  the  Apostles?  And 
when  we  recapitulate  the  factors  that  are  responsible  for  the  anti- 
Jewish  prejudice,  the  widespread  antagonism  against  the  Jew, 
are  we  not  compelled  to  set  down  the  hostility  of  the  Church,  the 
influence  of  the  Church,  as  one  of  the  principal  factors?  How 
explain  the  paradox:  reverence  for  the  Bible  of  the  Jews,  worship 
of  the  Redeemer,  the  Savior,  who  sprang  from  the  Jews,  and 
bitter  persecution  of  the  surviving  Jews?  The  paradox  is  easily 
resolved.  The  Church  included  the  Old  Testament  in  its  Bible 
because  it  contained  the  texts  prophesying  the  Messiah.  The 
Church  declared  that  these  prophecies  were  fulfilled  in  Jesus. 
The  prevailing  Jewish  Orthodox  opinion  has  been  that  the 
prophecies  have  not  yet  been  fulfilled,  that  the  Messiah  is  still  to 
be  expected.  This  difference  of  viewpoint  accounts  for  the  atti- 
tude of  the  Church  toward  the  Jewish  people.  They  were  never 
to  be  entirely  annihilated, — persecution  must  never  be  allowed  to 
go  so  far.  On  the  contrary,  they  were  to  be  preserved  as 
necessary  witnesses  to  the  prophecies.  But  they  were  also  to  be 
penalized  and  to  suffer  because  they  refused  to  believe  in  the 
fulfillment.  Nevertheless,  the  coincidence  of  the  two  faiths  in 
the  evaluation  of  the  Old  Testament,  the  fact  that  the  Wrestern 
nations  were  spiritually  nourished  on  the  Psalms  and  prophetic 
writings  of  the  Hebrews,  bears  upon  the  point  I  am  here  discuss- 
ing, the  congeniality  of  the  Jewish    and    Western   minds.     In 

10 


truth,  the  New  Testament  itself  is  in  large  measure  a  product  of 
the  Hebrew  mind. 

I  should  like  to  go  a  step  farther  and  say  that  for  my  part  I  do 
recognize  a  profound  difference  between  the  Hebrew  attitude  in 
religion  and  the  religious  attitude  of  Christendom.  The  Hebrew 
soul  as  manifested  in  religion  is  wholly  prepossessed  with  the 
infinitude  of  the  infinite,  the  unattainable  height  of  the  moral 
ideal  as  represented  in  the  Deity.  True,  man  is  said  to  be  the 
image  of  God,  but  the  distance  between  the  image  and  the  sub- 
lime original  is  unbridgable.  The  Christian  affirmation  in 
religion  is  that  the  Divine  is  capable  of  inhabiting  human  nature, 
that  man  is  capable  of  becoming  identified  with  God.  Now  so 
long  as  these  differences  are  expressed  in  rigid  doctrines,  they  are 
mutually  exclusive ;  but  when  freed  from  their  doctrinal  integu- 
ments and  expressed  in  terms  of  ethical  aspiration  they  are  not 
opposite  but  supplementary.  The  infinite  is  ever  the  unat- 
tainable, and  yet  it  is  also  that  towards  which  man  can  forever 
aspire,  even  if  in  his  finite  existence  he  will  never  become 
wholly  identified  with  it.* 

In  its  progress  toward  the  far-off  moral  ideal,  as  I  said  in  the 
beginning,  the  human  race  is  still  in  the  early  stages.  The  inno- 
cent victims  of  war  and  exploitation  will  still  have  to  suffer,  and 
the  objects  of  prejudice  will  not  be  able,  in  a  generation  or  two, 
to  wear  off  the  stigma.  The  world  was  not  made  for  man  to  be 
at  ease  in.  Why  should  the  modern  Jew  refuse  to  bear  his  share 
of  the  burden  the  full  heaviness  of  which  his  ancestors  carried  for 
two  thousand  years  with  such  invincible  spiritual  resistance? 

I  have  put  before  you  some  of  the  crude  instincts  and  tendencies 
that  operate  in  creating  this  prejudice:  the  fear  and  distrust  of 
whatever  is  unlike,  the  inability  to  comprehend  processes  and 

*  It  may  be  held  by  some  that  Zionism,  the  drift  back  toward  Palestine, 
which  is  in  Asia,  supports  the  contention  of  anti-Semitism  that  the  Jews  are 
Orientals.  I  have  stated  elsewhere  the  reasons  for  my  dissent  from  Zionism, 
but  all  the  same  it  seems  to  me  that  Zionism,  if  I  understand  it  rightly,  is  a 
movement  especially  inspired  by  Western  ideas.  It  is  taking  back  to  Palestine 
the  latest  Western  science,  the  latest  Western  improvements  in  agriculture,  the 
latest  engineering,  the  latest  city  planning,  the  latest  ideas  in  education.  And 
if  it  also  seeks  to  repristinate  the  prophetic  ideal,  it  does  so  in  so  far  as  the  ideal 
of  the  Hebrew  prophets  is  in  part  the  source,  in  any  case  in  agreement  with,  the 
Western  ideals  of  liberty  and  fraternity. 

II 


causes,  and  hence  the  disposition  to  ascribe  calamity  to  malig- 
nant personal  agents,  the  crude  habit  of  seeing  people  wholly 
black  or  white,  and  especially  of  seeing  the  seamy  side  and  ignor- 
ing the  nobler  qualities.  But  there  is  one  other  mischievous 
habit  of  morally  undeveloped  persons  which  I  must  mention 
before   I   conclude  my  remarks. 

It  is  the  habit  of  identifying  an  individual  with  the  real  or 
imaginary  traits  of  the  group  to  which  he  belongs,  and  generally 
with  the  traits  characteristic  of  the  baser  members  of  that  group, 
instead  of  accepting  or  rejecting  him  on  the  ground  of  his  own 
merits.  And  here  we  put  our  fingers  on  the  very  tap-root  of 
prejudice,  especially  as  it  shows  itself  in  social  discrimination. 
Social  discrimination  on  the  ground  of  differences  in  degree  of 
culture  and  refinement  is  not  only  permissible  but  indispensable. 
The  well-bred  cannot  be  asked  to  associate,  at  any  rate  at  close 
range,  with  the  ill-bred,  the  refined  with  the  vulgar,  the  educated 
with  the  raw  and  half-illiterate.  Although  it  should  be  dis- 
tinctly added  that  the  respect  which  is  due  to  every  human  being 
as  such  may  in  no  instance  be  violated.  But  social  discrimina- 
tion against  cultured  and  refined  persons  in  consequence  of 
prejudice  seems  to  me  inexcusable. 

Prejudice  works  harm  in  both  directions, — to  the  objects  of  it, 
and  to  those  who  entertain  it.  The  objects  of  prejudice,  when 
sensitive,  are  led  to  shrink  back  within  racial  lines,  and  are  apt  to 
lose  that  sureness  in  intercourse,  that  open  frankness  in  approach- 
ing others,  which  is  the  sign  of  manliness;  while  the  vulgar,  con- 
trariwise, are  led  to  exhibit  a  kind  of  insolent  defiance  and  un- 
lovely self-assertion.  But  those  who  entertain  the  prejudice  are 
no  less  harmed.  It  has  been  truly  said  that  no  one  can  shut  out 
other  folks  without  shutting  himself  in,  and  shutting  himself  in 
often  within  very  narrow  and  narrowing  bounds.  Prejudice  is 
a  fetter  fastened  upon  the  personality  that  prevents  its  free 
expansion.  It  is  a  sign  of  moral  backwardness.  For  it  is  true, 
sadly  true,  and  a  truth  to  be  remembered,  that  persons  otherwise 
highly  intellectual  and  refined  in  manner  may  yet  be  morally 
backward. 

And  how  should  the  prejudice  be  met?  When  Plato  was  told 
that  men  spoke  evil  of  him,  he  answered,  I  must  then  so  live  that 
they  will  be  compelled  to  change  their  tune.     To  live  on  benefi- 

12 


cently,  positively,  unvexed  by  the  maladjustments  that  still 
exist,  is  the  only  way.  The  person  against  whom  the  prejudice 
exists  is  bound  to  be  the  spiritual  helper  of  those  who  enter- 
tain the  prejudice.  It  is  said  that  malignant  growths  on  the 
body  are  now  cured  by  certain  rays.  Prejudice  is  a  kind  of 
malignant  growth  in  the  soul.  Let  your  radiations  be  such  as 
to  effect  the  cure. 

But  the  best  help  that  we  can  gain  on  this  subject  is  to  realize 
the  change  that  is  going  on  in  the  world,  the  opportunity  and 
need  of  world-wide  reconstruction.  The  architects  of  reconstruc- 
tion are  calling  loudly  for  helpers.  Be  one  of  the  helpers.  If 
you  are  engrossed  in  that  task,  you  will  not  have  time  to  think  of 
the  minor  frictions  of  life,  the  personal  incommodities.  Let 
not  the  Jewish  question  loom  so  large  in  your  mind  as  to  obscure 
the  world  questions.  Fit  yourself  to  do  your  share.  Aspire  to 
excellence.  Excellence  is  convincing.  Be  eminently  useful; 
nothing  can  then  prevent  you  from  being  eminently  welcome. 

But  especially  there  is  need,  as  every  one  who  has  fathomed  the 
malady  of  our  day  realizes,  of  a  new  moral  ideal  to  guide  mankind 
in  its  task  of  reconstruction,  a  new  plan  according  to  which  to 
reshape  the  relations  of  men  and  of  peoples.  We  need  more 
light,  we  need  a  new  ideal.  And  to  this  ideal  each  stock,  each 
race,  can  contribute.  There  is  not,  there  cannot  be,  a  single 
Chosen  Race.  There  is  not,  there  cannot  be,  a  monopoly  of 
spiritual  truth  and  insight.  The  pride  of  synagogue  and  church 
in  this  respect  at  last  must  be  laid  aside.  There  are  chosen 
spirits,  spiritually-minded  personalities  in  every  people,  and  these 
must  co-operate  in  religion.  And  therefore  I,  born  of  the  Jews, 
reverent  to  my  ancestry,  must  seek  to  contribute  the  gifts  of  my 
race,  if  I  can,  to  the  new  ideal.  But  I  must  also,  standing  where 
I  do,  stretch  out  my  hand  in  fellowship  to  men  and  women  of 
other  gifts  and  heritages.  For  I  need  what  they  can  give,  as  they 
perchance  may  need  what  I  can  offer.  Not  a  few  have  already 
answered  my  appeal,  others  will.  To  Jew  and  Gentile  I  speak, 
and  say:  Let  us  join  together  in  the  endeavor  to  create  the 
most  wonderful  thing  to  which  the  human  mind  can  give  birth, 
the  holy  vision — holier  than  any  that  the  past  has  known — -that 
shall  guide  mankind  through  its  sorrows  and  its  labors  towards 
the  better  time  to  come.     This  is  the  sense  and  purpose  of  our 

13 


Ethical  Movement.  And  in  this,  among  ourselves  and  those 
whom  we  can  reach,  will  be  finally  transcended  the  thing  that 
is  called  anti-Semitism. 

It  is  said  that  when  the  dawn  breaks,  the  spectral  apparitions 
that  have  flitted  through  the  fearsome  night  must  hie  them  back 
to  their  graves.  My  friends,  the  dawn  is  breaking  in  the  world, 
all  appearances  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding.  Let  the 
ghosts  of  the  buried  past  return  to  their  graves. 


14 


If  you  are  interested  to  know  more  about  the  Ethical  Move- 
ment in  America  and  the  work  of  its  local  organizations,  descrip- 
tive literature  will  be  sent  to  you  without  cost  on  application  to 

THE  AMERICAN  ETHICAL  UNION 
2  West  64th  Street,  New  York  City 


On  Sale  at  the  Above  Address,  or  Mailed  at  Prices  Quoted, 
the  Following 

BOOKS  AND  PAMPHLETS  ON  ETHICAL  SUBJECTS 

By  Felix  Adler.  An  Ethical  Philosophy  of  Life,  $3.25.  The  Religion  of 
Duty,  50  cents.  Moral  Instruction  of  Children,  $2.00.  Life  and  Destiny, 
cloth,  50  cents.  The  World  Crisis  and  Its  Meaning,  $2.00.  Marriage  and 
Divorce,  $1.00.  The  Spiritual  Meaning  of  Marriage,  10  cents.  The  Vision 
of  New  York  as  the  Democratic  Metropolis  of  the  Future,  10  cents.  The 
Punishment  of  Children,  10  cents.  The  Protestant  Reformation,  10  cents. 
The  Moral  Prerequisites  of  a  League  of  Nations,  10  cents.  The  Punishment 
of  Individuals  and  of  Peoples,  10  cents.  National  Self-Determination  and 
Its  Limits,  10  cents.  Religion  and  the  Joy  of  Life,  10  cents.  Nationalism 
and  Zionism,  10  cents. 

By  William  M.  Salter.  Moral  Aspiration  and  Song  (36  Hymns  with  Music), 
25  cents.     Ethical  Religion,  $1.50. 

By  Walter  L.  Sheldon.  Old  Testament  Bible  Stories  for  the  Young,  $1.1.5. 
Citizenship  and  the  Duties  of  a  Citizen,  $1.15.  The  Life  of  Jesus  for  the 
Young,  new  edition,  $1.00.  The  Bible  from  the  Standpoint  of  Modern  Schol- 
arship, $1.00.  A  Sentiment  in  Verse  for  Every  Day  in  the  Year,  75  cents. 
A  Wisdom  Gem  for  Every  Morning  and  Evening  in  the  Year,  75  cents. 

By  Alfred  W.  Martin.  Foundations  for  Faith  in  a  Future  Life,  $1.50.  The 
Dawn  of  Christianity,  $2.00.  Psychic  Tendencies  of  To-day,  $1.50.  Great 
Historic  Ideals  of  Life,  25  cents.  Beliefs  Commonly  Held  Among  Us,  10 
cents.     The  Modern  Ideal  of  Marriage,  $1.00. 

By  William  James.     Is  Life  Worth  Living,  10  cents. 

By  Horace  J.  Bridges.  Criticisms  of  Life,  $1.50.  The  Religion  of  Expe- 
rience, $1.50.     Worry:   Its  Cause  and  Cure,  35  cents. 

By  F.  J.  Gould.  Children's  Book  of  Moral  Lessons.  Four  Series,  75  cents 
each.     Stories  for  Moral  Instruction,  75  cents.     Brave  Citizens,  75  cents. 

By  Percival  Chubb.  The  Religion  of  Young  America  During  the  War — 
and  After,  10  cents.     Our  Ethical  Faith,  15  cents. 


m 


'% 


S3 


_A    Hi 


^< 


lANCElfJ] 


a 


vsng  tvsn 


3 


^OF-CAIJ 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 

This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


NOV  1  6  1£ 
DUE  2  WKS  FROM  DAT 


QL 


IB-583L 


92 
RECEIVED 


jm  0  6. 1997 


REC'D  LD-URL 


||2«^ 


JITVDJO^ 
^OF-CAIIFOR^ 


n-^ 


<b k  £ 


^ 


LfJ> 


315 


*%0JI 


'Or— "^ 

qQ — i 


li_      1^^=- 


>°l, 


OF-CAtll 


5   ,— - '  I 


Elftx 


University  of  California.  Los  Angeles 


L  006  622  1 34  2 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


A  A  001  434  756  1 


